PETA Protest at KFC in Seoul --- Protesting the inhumane treatment of chickens used by fast food chain KFC, Brandi Vallodolid and Christina Cho stayed in a cage for more than an hour Monday, October 24, 2005 outside the KFC in Seosomoon, Seoul.
Monday, October 24, 2005
PETA protest against KFC in Korea
PETA Protest at KFC in Seoul --- Protesting the inhumane treatment of chickens used by fast food chain KFC, Brandi Vallodolid and Christina Cho stayed in a cage for more than an hour Monday, October 24, 2005 outside the KFC in Seosomoon, Seoul.
KFC target of bikini-clad PETA protest
by Tracey Stark
Two bikini-clad protesters squatted in a small cage for more than an hour yesterday in front of a KFC in Seoul to protest the inhumane treatment of chickens supplied to the fast food chain.
As the regular lunch hour was beginning in Seoul, two women in yellow bikinis and silver high heels walked down the street carrying a small wire cage and signs that read, "KFC Tortures Chicks," in both English and Korean, stopped in front of the fast food restaurant, squatted on the ground and placed the cage over their heads.
They were in Seoul as part of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals' ongoing protest -- called "Kentucky Fried Cruelty" -- against what they say is the fast food chains' suppliers' continual inhumane treatment of chickens.
The cage was less than one meter wide, and three-quarters of a meter deep and tall. But the women were not complaining about the cramped space.
"It's not as uncomfortable as having a beak cut off and being trampled in a cage my entire life," said Brandi Vallodolid, who works at PETA's main U.S. office in Norfolk, Virginia.
"We have way more space than the chickens do. Their personal living space is smaller than a standard sheet of paper," Christina Cho, a classical pianist and part-time activist added.
According to PETA's website and a documentary narrated by actress Pamela Anderson, the chickens supplied to KFC live in over-crowded conditions, develop diseases from high ammonia levels, become lame and crippled from drugs that speed up growth and accidents related to being top heavy, and when they are caught for slaughter they are often thrown violently into small containers, resulting in broken legs and wings. The video also showed the operation of a beak-trimming machine used on young chicks.
The slaughtering process, PETA claims, is even worse. First, the chickens are hung upside down, then run through a stun bath, with voltages so low the chickens are often completely conscious. The chickens' throats are then slit and they are next dipped into scalding hot water for feather removal. Again, PETA says, the chickens are still often conscious.
"The beak-trimming machine shown in the PETA video … is no longer in common use in our industry," said Richard Lobb, a spokesperson for the National Chicken Council.
PETA spokesperson Bruce Friedrich insisted that all the video was shot within the last year and a half of its release.
KFC could not be reached for comment, but animal welfare guidelines and press releases at http://www.kfc.com/ refute every accusation that PETA has made.
"As a major purchaser of food products, we have the opportunity, and responsibility, to influence the way animals supplied to us are treated. We take that responsibility very seriously, and we are monitoring our suppliers on an ongoing basis … As a consequence, it is our goal to only deal with suppliers who promise to maintain our high standards and share our commitment to animal welfare.
They also show their animal welfare and poultry guidelines, covering comfort and shelter, catching, transport, holding, stunning, and humane slaughter. "If an audit reveals dirty or sick birds, corrective action at the grow-out house must be taken by the supplier," KFC's website said.
The website also lists an animal welfare council consisting of animal welfare experts. "In consultation with our Council, Yum! Brands (the parent company of KFC) has developed guidelines and audit programs for our suppliers in the broiler industry," the website said.
Broilers are chickens used for their meat.
Several of the people still listed on the website have recently resigned their posts over a proposed confidentiality agreement. Dr. Temple Grandin, Colorado State University and Dr. Ian Duncan, Department of Animal & Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Ontario. The agreement would prevent them from speaking to the press about any of their findings or conclusions related to KFC suppliers.
In a Chicago Tribune article former advisor Adele Douglass said that KFC "never had any meetings. They never asked for any advice, and then they touted to the press that they had this animal-welfare committee. I felt like I was being used."
Although PETA had no concrete information about suppliers of Korea's KFC restaurants they say it is the same everywhere.
"We've never done an investigation anywhere where there weren't egregious violations. It's the nature of mass production, but they have to find a way to do it humanely," Vallodolid said.
One such supplier was Pilgrim's Pride, in West Virginia. Hidden video cameras caught workers stomping on the chickens, drop-kicking them like footballs and throwing them violently against a wall. And it appeared that the workers were doing it for fun.
The footage was shot by a PETA investigator who worked from October 2003 to May 2004 at the Pilgrim's Pride plant in Moorefield, which won KFC's "Supplier of the Year" award in 1997.
KFC's president Gregg Dedrick said in a press conference after the release of the video in July 2004, "As a responsible corporate citizen, we require all our suppliers to treat animals humanely. This behavior by Pilgrim's Pride employees is not only appalling, it violates the standards we have in place for all our suppliers."
"We think it's outrageous that PETA is unfairly singling out KFC. They've done this because we're the most recognized brand selling chicken today, and our name, Kentucky Fried Chicken, is synonymous with chicken. So we have become their target. The truth is, we sell about 5 percent of all the chicken in America today -- that's less than the leading burger chain."
Dedrick added, "PETA's campaign distorts the truth and we would ask the media to report the true facts of the situation."
Cho was arrested in Korea in January this year for a similar protest in Myeong-dong, Seoul. The difference then was that she and a cohort were topless. She was charged with indecent exposure and blocking traffic.
She added that the policeman who arrested her told her that he didn't want to, but had to do his job. "He said he hoped his daughters would be like me and stand up for what they believe in."
As for protesting in bikinis and even topless, they say it is the best way to attract the most attention.
"It's the MTV generation. We have to do something flashy or we just won't get people's attention," said Jason Baker of PETA Asia-Pacific, and one of the organizers of this protest. "If you just hold up a sign people just don't care."
He said that he has been in the cage before on demonstrations and attracted a lot of media attention. "But nothing like this," he said, pointing at the swarm of camera men and women.
"We're not here to make a problem. We're here to bring awareness to people everywhere," Cho said from inside the cage.
Vallodolid added, "This leads to more hits on the website -- http://www.peta.org/ -- and that leads to change."
The protest ended after about an hour without incident.(traceystark@heraldm.com)
Two bikini-clad protesters squatted in a small cage for more than an hour yesterday in front of a KFC in Seoul to protest the inhumane treatment of chickens supplied to the fast food chain.
As the regular lunch hour was beginning in Seoul, two women in yellow bikinis and silver high heels walked down the street carrying a small wire cage and signs that read, "KFC Tortures Chicks," in both English and Korean, stopped in front of the fast food restaurant, squatted on the ground and placed the cage over their heads.
They were in Seoul as part of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals' ongoing protest -- called "Kentucky Fried Cruelty" -- against what they say is the fast food chains' suppliers' continual inhumane treatment of chickens.
The cage was less than one meter wide, and three-quarters of a meter deep and tall. But the women were not complaining about the cramped space.
"It's not as uncomfortable as having a beak cut off and being trampled in a cage my entire life," said Brandi Vallodolid, who works at PETA's main U.S. office in Norfolk, Virginia.
"We have way more space than the chickens do. Their personal living space is smaller than a standard sheet of paper," Christina Cho, a classical pianist and part-time activist added.
According to PETA's website and a documentary narrated by actress Pamela Anderson, the chickens supplied to KFC live in over-crowded conditions, develop diseases from high ammonia levels, become lame and crippled from drugs that speed up growth and accidents related to being top heavy, and when they are caught for slaughter they are often thrown violently into small containers, resulting in broken legs and wings. The video also showed the operation of a beak-trimming machine used on young chicks.
The slaughtering process, PETA claims, is even worse. First, the chickens are hung upside down, then run through a stun bath, with voltages so low the chickens are often completely conscious. The chickens' throats are then slit and they are next dipped into scalding hot water for feather removal. Again, PETA says, the chickens are still often conscious.
"The beak-trimming machine shown in the PETA video … is no longer in common use in our industry," said Richard Lobb, a spokesperson for the National Chicken Council.
PETA spokesperson Bruce Friedrich insisted that all the video was shot within the last year and a half of its release.
KFC could not be reached for comment, but animal welfare guidelines and press releases at http://www.kfc.com/ refute every accusation that PETA has made.
"As a major purchaser of food products, we have the opportunity, and responsibility, to influence the way animals supplied to us are treated. We take that responsibility very seriously, and we are monitoring our suppliers on an ongoing basis … As a consequence, it is our goal to only deal with suppliers who promise to maintain our high standards and share our commitment to animal welfare.
They also show their animal welfare and poultry guidelines, covering comfort and shelter, catching, transport, holding, stunning, and humane slaughter. "If an audit reveals dirty or sick birds, corrective action at the grow-out house must be taken by the supplier," KFC's website said.
The website also lists an animal welfare council consisting of animal welfare experts. "In consultation with our Council, Yum! Brands (the parent company of KFC) has developed guidelines and audit programs for our suppliers in the broiler industry," the website said.
Broilers are chickens used for their meat.
Several of the people still listed on the website have recently resigned their posts over a proposed confidentiality agreement. Dr. Temple Grandin, Colorado State University and Dr. Ian Duncan, Department of Animal & Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Ontario. The agreement would prevent them from speaking to the press about any of their findings or conclusions related to KFC suppliers.
In a Chicago Tribune article former advisor Adele Douglass said that KFC "never had any meetings. They never asked for any advice, and then they touted to the press that they had this animal-welfare committee. I felt like I was being used."
Although PETA had no concrete information about suppliers of Korea's KFC restaurants they say it is the same everywhere.
"We've never done an investigation anywhere where there weren't egregious violations. It's the nature of mass production, but they have to find a way to do it humanely," Vallodolid said.
One such supplier was Pilgrim's Pride, in West Virginia. Hidden video cameras caught workers stomping on the chickens, drop-kicking them like footballs and throwing them violently against a wall. And it appeared that the workers were doing it for fun.
The footage was shot by a PETA investigator who worked from October 2003 to May 2004 at the Pilgrim's Pride plant in Moorefield, which won KFC's "Supplier of the Year" award in 1997.
KFC's president Gregg Dedrick said in a press conference after the release of the video in July 2004, "As a responsible corporate citizen, we require all our suppliers to treat animals humanely. This behavior by Pilgrim's Pride employees is not only appalling, it violates the standards we have in place for all our suppliers."
"We think it's outrageous that PETA is unfairly singling out KFC. They've done this because we're the most recognized brand selling chicken today, and our name, Kentucky Fried Chicken, is synonymous with chicken. So we have become their target. The truth is, we sell about 5 percent of all the chicken in America today -- that's less than the leading burger chain."
Dedrick added, "PETA's campaign distorts the truth and we would ask the media to report the true facts of the situation."
Cho was arrested in Korea in January this year for a similar protest in Myeong-dong, Seoul. The difference then was that she and a cohort were topless. She was charged with indecent exposure and blocking traffic.
She added that the policeman who arrested her told her that he didn't want to, but had to do his job. "He said he hoped his daughters would be like me and stand up for what they believe in."
As for protesting in bikinis and even topless, they say it is the best way to attract the most attention.
"It's the MTV generation. We have to do something flashy or we just won't get people's attention," said Jason Baker of PETA Asia-Pacific, and one of the organizers of this protest. "If you just hold up a sign people just don't care."
He said that he has been in the cage before on demonstrations and attracted a lot of media attention. "But nothing like this," he said, pointing at the swarm of camera men and women.
"We're not here to make a problem. We're here to bring awareness to people everywhere," Cho said from inside the cage.
Vallodolid added, "This leads to more hits on the website -- http://www.peta.org/ -- and that leads to change."
The protest ended after about an hour without incident.(traceystark@heraldm.com)
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Police break up disabled protest
The Korea Herald, Oct. 12, 2005
Police break up disabled protest
By Tracey Stark
and Kwon Ji-young
Activists demanding proper education for the disabled chained themselves to the gate of the Seoul government complex and painted slogans on the sidewalk yesterday in a protest that resulted in police detaining 43 people.
The demonstration began at 11 a.m. when about six people in wheelchairs, out of a group of 50 protesters, were chained to the front gate of the Gwanghwamun complex by able-bodied compatriots to protest low government funding for disabled education.
"We decided to stage a surprise protest which went to extremes because we didn't receive any response from the government during a long protest in front of the Blue House," said Kim Ki-ryong, representative of the coalition for the educational rights of disabled people.
A sign complaining about a lack of funding was spread across the ground in front of the protesters while four members of the group spray-painted slogans in red and black on the sidewalk. The main English-language sign next to the gate was also defaced with red paint to resemble dripping blood.
In the early minutes of the protest, several officers attempted to stop the spray painters but were met with shoves and shouts. The outnumbered police and complex security guards backed off and waited for more police to arrive.
"Over 300 police came and dragged 43 of us to 10 different police stations. There was a struggle between the police and protesters as they were forcibly dragged away," said Kim. As of press time the detainees remained in police custody.
Of the protesters, 10 were disabled students, 15 were their parents, and 25 were university students of special education.
The group wants an increased budget for disabled education, more special education teachers and education laws for disabled students.
"This year, the government cut back the budget for special education by 8 billion won, and reduced the number of teachers from 444 to 36, and the number of assistants from 3,000 to 2,500," said Do Gyeong-man, executive director of the coalition for disabled education rights.
Yesterday's protest follows a two-week demonstration Sept. 22-Oct. 5 in front of the Blue House during which the group asked to meet President Roh Moo-hyun. "The government did not respond at all to our requests," said Kim. Receiving no response from the government, the group decided on more desperate measures to draw attention to their case.
Within 15 minutes of the start of the Gwanghwamun protest, two busloads of police officers arrived and parked in front of the protesters, effectively blocking the view of passing motorists. Several other police units arrived from around the corner, making a total of more than 100. The helmeted police, many armed with shields and meter-long batons, surrounded the disabled protesters and began pulling them from the gate. Several other officers with bolt cutters were sent inside the complex to cut the chains in order to remove the wheelchairs.
One severely disabled protester, once unchained, accelerated his electric-powered chair, pulling along four policemen and knocking a police photographer off a ladder. When he was subdued, the protester was removed from his chair and ended up writhing on the ground.
Another protester escaped the confines of his wheelchair and crawled under a police bus while a man with a loudspeaker voiced the group's complaints to a growing crowd of onlookers.
After a little more than an hour most of the protesters were removed, although the spray-painted slogans were still visible. There was no immediate word from the government about the budget for the education of the disabled. (traceystark@heraldm.com) (jkwon@heraldm.com)
Police break up disabled protest
By Tracey Stark
and Kwon Ji-young
Activists demanding proper education for the disabled chained themselves to the gate of the Seoul government complex and painted slogans on the sidewalk yesterday in a protest that resulted in police detaining 43 people.
The demonstration began at 11 a.m. when about six people in wheelchairs, out of a group of 50 protesters, were chained to the front gate of the Gwanghwamun complex by able-bodied compatriots to protest low government funding for disabled education.
"We decided to stage a surprise protest which went to extremes because we didn't receive any response from the government during a long protest in front of the Blue House," said Kim Ki-ryong, representative of the coalition for the educational rights of disabled people.
A sign complaining about a lack of funding was spread across the ground in front of the protesters while four members of the group spray-painted slogans in red and black on the sidewalk. The main English-language sign next to the gate was also defaced with red paint to resemble dripping blood.
In the early minutes of the protest, several officers attempted to stop the spray painters but were met with shoves and shouts. The outnumbered police and complex security guards backed off and waited for more police to arrive.
"Over 300 police came and dragged 43 of us to 10 different police stations. There was a struggle between the police and protesters as they were forcibly dragged away," said Kim. As of press time the detainees remained in police custody.
Of the protesters, 10 were disabled students, 15 were their parents, and 25 were university students of special education.
The group wants an increased budget for disabled education, more special education teachers and education laws for disabled students.
"This year, the government cut back the budget for special education by 8 billion won, and reduced the number of teachers from 444 to 36, and the number of assistants from 3,000 to 2,500," said Do Gyeong-man, executive director of the coalition for disabled education rights.
Yesterday's protest follows a two-week demonstration Sept. 22-Oct. 5 in front of the Blue House during which the group asked to meet President Roh Moo-hyun. "The government did not respond at all to our requests," said Kim. Receiving no response from the government, the group decided on more desperate measures to draw attention to their case.
Within 15 minutes of the start of the Gwanghwamun protest, two busloads of police officers arrived and parked in front of the protesters, effectively blocking the view of passing motorists. Several other police units arrived from around the corner, making a total of more than 100. The helmeted police, many armed with shields and meter-long batons, surrounded the disabled protesters and began pulling them from the gate. Several other officers with bolt cutters were sent inside the complex to cut the chains in order to remove the wheelchairs.
One severely disabled protester, once unchained, accelerated his electric-powered chair, pulling along four policemen and knocking a police photographer off a ladder. When he was subdued, the protester was removed from his chair and ended up writhing on the ground.
Another protester escaped the confines of his wheelchair and crawled under a police bus while a man with a loudspeaker voiced the group's complaints to a growing crowd of onlookers.
After a little more than an hour most of the protesters were removed, although the spray-painted slogans were still visible. There was no immediate word from the government about the budget for the education of the disabled. (traceystark@heraldm.com) (jkwon@heraldm.com)
Thursday, October 06, 2005
The Promotion: a short story
By Tracey Stark
They said he wouldn’t go far, but he had proven them all wrong. There he sat in that office with his name on the door, four floors above the manicured courtyard and opposite the stacks, marveling at his reflection in the smoke-stained window.
“I have arrived,” he said, then grinned broadly to his window-self, his bleached-white teeth glowing and fighting for prominence behind sagging rubbery lips. He repeated this every morning since his promotion to Assistant Director of Accounting, Payroll and Pension Department of the Allegheny Electric Co-op.
BUZZZ
“Ms. Lintel, come in here please.”
“Yes, Mr. Bottoms,” a tinny voice replied through the antiquated call box.
The door opened and a dour woman of about 50 walked in, ruler straight in posture, gray in demeanor. A smile would surely crack the thin coating of skin covering her angular face. (In certain light, towards the end of a winter’s day, she appeared translucent, Mr. Bottoms had noted.)
“I need more, um… notepads and paperclips,” he said, then turned back to the window and resumed smiling at his reflection.
Ms. Lintel looked at the stack of notepads on the spare chair and the boxes of paperclips scattered about the otherwise-empty bookshelf, shook her head, and left. She would fill the order by lunch and remain idle until 5 p.m. Then at 5 she would rise to leave for the day and receive one more buzz from Mr. Bottoms. When she went into his office he would invariably say to her, “Good job today, Ms. Lintel. See you bright and early tomorrow, I’m sure.” She would thank him tersely, make an abrupt about-face, and march from the office straight to her car at the far end of the lot.
This had been going on for the two months since his move from personnel to accounting, a move precipitated by an accident. Not an accident of paperwork, but an accident involving a filing cabinet and a portion of rotten flooring. (It could be argued that paperwork was involved, as the filing cabinet was full when it fell through the ceiling and crushed his right leg.)
The out of court settlement was favorable for all involved. Mr. Bottoms was not a greedy man and his request for a promotion to the fourth floor, a small raise, and a parking space among the executives (as well as medical costs, of course) was accepted with a smile and a handshake and delivered before the steel rods were removed from his fractured bones.
Through the thin walls Ms. Lintel could hear queer mutterings in different voices. She didn’t ask, but suspected the accident had left him a bit shell-shocked.
Back in his office, Mr. Bottoms continued to stare out the window thinking about what it had taken to get here. He worked his way up from the ground floor. Five years in the mail room, and then the little incident with the sorting machine and his pinky finger. Cost him the last digit, but earned him a job in customer service on the second floor. Seven years on and then there was the electrical fire that left him with third degree burns on his left arm. Skin grafts and a promotion to personnel (third floor), followed by his longest stint: 13 years. Lucky 13, he thought. The sagging ceiling should have been a dead giveaway, but everyone seemed to regard it as normal. So he didn’t ask any questions and sat at his desk, two inches closer to the ceiling than everyone else, until the distance closed to zero in a matter of seconds on that fateful Tuesday in October.
And now he was in an office devoid of computers, sagging ceilings, windows that opened, and furniture that could fall on him. (The bookshelf was bolted to the wall and his chair had no wheels.)
Pondering this he realized it was time for him to knuckle down and get to work. But his responsibilities were vague at best. They told him, “We will utilize your expertise in certain areas of accounting from time to time.” But he had no expertise in any areas of accounting, he thought.
He also knew there was little he could do about it this day, so he resumed his self-congratulation and continued to stare out the window.
At five he buzzed Ms. Lintel once more into his office.
“Good job today, Ms. Lintel. See you bright and early tomorrow, I’m sure,” he said and smiled his oversized mouth at her, and gave her a waving salute with his 4 2/3-fingered right hand.
Moments later, when he was sure she was halfway down to the lobby, Mr. Bottoms picked up his briefcase (empty but for half of a sandwich and a few notebooks), and walked to the elevator.
To his surprise, Ms. Lintel was still waiting for the elevator car to come pick her up. It was a strange sensation, for both of them, be assured, to stand side by side in silence at the end of a day during which they had spent the better part of eight hours one on each side of the wall, like a confessioner and priest.
It was Ms. Lintel who spoke first.
“I don’t suppose taking the stairs would be good for your leg, would it?” she asked.
Mr. Bottoms was pleased by her sudden interest in him.
“Well, I guess I won’t know if I don’t try,” he replied and swagger-limped to the fire stairs door. She hesitantly followed and for a moment looked as if she might smile. (She didn’t.)
Upon opening the door he was greeted by crumbling and missing stairs, the stench of mildew and a complete lack of lighting. His first step would have been his last had Ms. Lintel not reached out a boney hand and pulled him back with surprising force.
“Oh my,” he said grasping his tie and loosening it an inch. “That would have been a doozy of a fall.”
“Yes, and you might have made vice president had you survived it,” she said with a hint of sarcasm in her voice.
But Mr. Bottoms only heard the words “vice president” and lost himself in a reverie about a bigger office on a higher floor.
“Vice president?’ he asked the air around him.
Ms. Lintel followed his gaze and saw that it ended in thin air only a foot or two in front of his face.
“I was only being facetious, sir,” she said.
“Vice president,” he repeated.
Ms. Lintel stepped away from him and toward the elevator. He turned and followed, still lost in those two magical words.
“And you would have been the vice president’s executive secretary,” he said to her, his mouth stretched into a frog-like grin.
“Indeed,” she said, pondering the implications, and looked toward their small office suite. She noticed the room was still aglow and she shook her head at Mr. Bottom’s absentmindedness. She was taught not to waste electricity, even if you did work at the power company. “Let me just go turn off the lights. I’ll be right back, in case the elevator gets here.”
“Of course,” he said and watched her walk through the tall wooden door.
A moment later the elevator chimed and the doors opened.
“The elevator’s here, Ms. Lintel. I’ll hold it for you,” he shouted, and stepped backward into a starless void.
As he plummeted the five floors to the basement, only one thought went through his mind: “Vice president.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
